| Author |
 Replies: 9 / Views: 1,346 |
|
|
New Member
United States
22 Posts |
In another thread I listed sixteen Ikes that I inherited in a small collection, seeking more general feedback before I posted any photos. https://goccf.com/t/479467 Two coins that emerged as (potentially, kinda, maybe) of interest were those that came with the 1973 uncirculated mint sets, owing to the lack of circulated Ikes that year. My reading suggests that it would still require a very high grade (MS65 or higher?) before a 1973 would support the extra cost of grading, so I am posting here to see if this one is anywhere in the ballpark... or if it simply joins the growing stack of "not worth the trouble?" I have not removed from the pliofilm (cellophane) pouch, and this was the best of several attempts to photograph, using a plate of glass on top. Some of the imperfections/scratches in the photo are due to the wrapper, and that obviously makes it hard to assess the coin itself. I would welcome advice on improving the photo, if one should not be removing these mint sets from the original package?  Edited by Morgana
05/17/2025 9:45 pm
|
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
73688 Posts |
I think there's too many light scratches and bag marks for it to make it to MS-65. I think it'll grade at MS-64 at best. Could be wrong though.
Errers and Varietys.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
 United States
10484 Posts |
Just look at the rims how many little nicks/hits are all over them. That would never grade a 65.
|
|
New Member
 United States
22 Posts |
Thanks. That's why I needed more experienced eyes on these. If nothing else, I am seeing the need to remove from cellophane wrapper, if I ever did have something that required undistorted photos.
|
|
New Member
United States
22 Posts |
Based on feedback thus far, I am going to experiment with this as a learning experience, and post an updated pic of same coin after removing from pliofilm/cellophane mint packaging. This may or may not result in any difference in grading, which is fine, but it seemed clear that SOME of the wrinkles and shadows were caused by shooting photo through two layers of plastic and glass. This one is unencumbered....  Edited by Morgana
05/19/2025 2:42 pm
|
|
Moderator
United States
187702 Posts |
Eisenhower dollars have huge open fields and are therefore a mark magnet. That is to say, I have seen worse. Yes, the plastic can hide how good or bad they are. Also, some marks can look better or worse depending on the viewing angle. For me, it really depends on how distracting any marks are to the overall eye appeal. When I look at whole coin, can I ignore a mark or does it effortlessly take my attention? For this example, some of the marks appear to be scuffs on the plastic and others are easy to ignore. I have seen similar looking dollars in 65 holders, but I have also seen better looking 64s. I have not seen a 63 look this decent, so I believe 64 to 65 is an acceptable range.
|
|
Moderator
United States
187702 Posts |
After seeing the new photos, I can confirm some of the marks must have been on the plastic. Most of the marks I see are typical of how the Eisenhower dollar strikes up, which were made to look worse by the plastic. I am more happy to give this a 65 than I was earlier.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2003 Posts |
A decent looking Ike that may grade MS-65 however even at a 65, a slabbed pcgs example is only valued at $45 which wouldn't cover the costs of grading. Now in MS-66 this coin skyrockets to $525 but I doubt your coin would grade 66.
|
|
Moderator
United States
187702 Posts |
For the record, I am not suggesting this coin should be or needs to be graded by a TPG. My related comments are just for reference, especially since I have a graded set of Ikes from which to draw comparisons. |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
36558 Posts |
|
| |
Replies: 9 / Views: 1,346 |
|
Posted 05/18/2025 12:59 am
